Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 31, 2026
Application No. 18/770,876

FLASH MEMORY DEVICE HAVING A CALIBRATION MODE

Non-Final OA §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Jul 12, 2024
Priority
Nov 26, 2012 — provisional 61/730,018 +7 more
Examiner
PATEL, NIMESH G
Art Unit
2176
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Rambus Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
10m
Est. Remaining
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allowance Rate
560 granted / 726 resolved
+22.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
748
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
65.8%
+25.8% vs TC avg
§102
20.1%
-19.9% vs TC avg
§112
4.5%
-35.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 726 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
DETAILED ACTION The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/ patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of US 11,803,489. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it is clear from the language of the claims that the invention set forth in claims 2-21 can be practiced by the invention set forth in claims 1-17 of US 11,803,489. Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of US 11,829,308 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it is clear from the language of the claims that the invention set forth in claims 1-20 can be practiced by the invention set forth in claims 1-20 of US 11,829,308. Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of US 12,072,817. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it is clear from the language of the claims that the invention set forth in claims 1-20 can be practiced by the invention set forth in claims 1-20 of US 12,072,817. Regarding claim 2, US 11,803,489 teaches a method of operation in a flash memory controller to control a flash memory device, the method comprising: at startup of the flash memory device, sending, to a receiver circuit of the flash memory device, signals having a first voltage swing at a first signaling frequency, wherein the flash memory device is to initialize an internal reference voltage to a default voltage for the receiver circuit; and sending a first command that specifies calibration of the flash memory device during a calibration mode, wherein the calibration mode is used to calibrate the flash memory device to operate at a second signaling frequency and receive signals having a second voltage swing, wherein the second voltage swing is smaller than the first voltage swing and the second signaling frequency is higher than the first signaling frequency. (claim 1). Regarding claim 2, 11,829,308 teaches a method of operation in a flash memory controller to control a flash memory device, the method comprising: at startup of the flash memory device, sending, to a receiver circuit of the flash memory device, signals having a first voltage swing at a first signaling frequency, wherein the flash memory device is to initialize an internal reference voltage to a default voltage for the receiver circuit; and sending a first command that specifies calibration of the flash memory device during a calibration mode, wherein the calibration mode is used to calibrate the flash memory device to operate at a second signaling frequency and receive signals having a second voltage swing, wherein the second voltage swing is smaller than the first voltage swing and the second signaling frequency is higher than the first signaling frequency(claim 1). Regarding claim 2, 12,072,817 teaches a method of operation in a flash memory controller to control a flash memory device, the method comprising: at startup of the flash memory device, sending, to a receiver circuit of the flash memory device, signals having a first voltage swing at a first signaling frequency, wherein the flash memory device is to initialize an internal reference voltage to a default voltage for the receiver circuit; and sending a first command that specifies calibration of the flash memory device during a calibration mode, wherein the calibration mode is used to calibrate the flash memory device to operate at a second signaling frequency and receive signals having a second voltage swing, wherein the second voltage swing is smaller than the first voltage swing and the second signaling frequency is higher than the first signaling frequency(claim 1). Claims 3-21 are also taught by claims 1-17 of US 11,803,489. Claims 3-21 are also taught by claims 1-20 of US 11,829,308. Claims 3-21 are also taught by claims 1-20 of US 12,072,817. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIMESH G PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-3640. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8:15-4:15. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jaweed Abbaszadeh can be reached on 571-270-1640. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /NIMESH G PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2176
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 12, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12687913
S5 POWER STATE CONTROL ACTION
3y 5m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12661188
METHOD FOR INTELLIGENT INSTRUMENTS FOR MODULAR ENERGY SYSTEM
5y 2m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12664114
HIGHLY SCALABLE ACCELERATOR
2y 0m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12657036
REMOTE CONFIGURATION OF BIOS SETTINGS
2y 7m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12657123
ALLOCATING DATA STORAGE DEVICE RESOURCES BASED ON DETERMINED CAPABILITIES OF A HOST DEVICE
2y 3m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+7.4%)
2y 10m (~10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 726 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month